Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Response to consultation on changes to
proven reoffending statistics
England and Wales
Ministry of Justice
28 April 2016
2
Contents
Contents ......................................................................................................... 2
1. Introduction ......................................................................................... 3
2. Summary of changes .......................................................................... 4
3. Summary of responses ....................................................................... 5
4. Changes to proven reoffending measure .......................................... 7
4.1 Measuring proven reoffending ................................................................................... 7
4.2 Payment by results and National Probation Service proven reoffending
performance measure ............................................................................................................ 8
4.3 Offender cohort breakdowns ...................................................................................... 9
4.4 Three month offender cohorts .................................................................................... 9
4.5 Historical data and geographical breakdowns ....................................................... 10
4.6 OGRS4/G and YOGRS – adult and juvenile likelihood of reoffending .............. 11
4.7 Interim results ............................................................................................................. 12
4.8 Publication outline ...................................................................................................... 13
4.9 Publication timetable .................................................................................................. 14
Annex A: List of respondents .................................................................... 15
Contact points ............................................................................................. 16
3
1. Introduction
In “Transforming Rehabilitation: A Strategy for Reform”, published in 2013, plans were set
out to introduce a new system for the management and rehabilitation of offenders in the
community across England and Wales.
The programme, which was fully implemented in February 2015 aims to bring down
reoffending rates while continuing to protect the public.
From 30 July 2015 to 30 October 2015, the Ministry of Justice ran a consultation on changes
to the proven reoffending statistical publication.
The key change that was proposed was to align the existing reoffending measure with those
measures necessary for assessing progress against the rehabilitation reforms.
The consultation set out the following key proposals:
1. To extend the existing reoffending quarterly publication of headline statistical
information on adult and juvenile reoffending with one that will include
reoffending outcomes for the payment by results (PbR) element of the
reforms, split by relevant cohorts and Community Rehabilitation Companies
(CRCs); and
reoffending outcomes for the National Probation Service (NPS), split by
relevant cohorts and the seven NPS divisions;
2. Three month cohorts for all measures of reoffending including for juveniles, which will
then align with the adult PbR element of the reforms.
3. To replace the ‘adjusted to baseline’ reoffending rates previously available in the
proven reoffending bulletin with OGRS4/G (Offender Group Reconviction Scale); and
4. To produce interim PbR figures, this will help to address the information gap created
by switching to three month cohorts for reporting reoffending and will allow CRCs’
progress to be assessed at the earliest opportunity.
Users’ views were invited on these proposed changes and 19 responses to the consultation
were received.
This document provides feedback on the comments received and clarifies the changes to
future publications of proven reoffending statistics that are planned in response to those
comments.
If you have any feedback, questions or requests for further information about this statistical
consultation response, please direct them to [email protected].
4
2. Summary of changes
The key change that was proposed was to align the existing reoffending measure with those
measures necessary for assessing progress against the rehabilitation reforms. Other
proposals were around how this change would be supported.
Proposal Post consultation position
1 To change to three month
cohorts to measure all
reoffending and the creation of
annual cohorts, combining the
preceding quarterly cohorts, to
permit geographical
breakdowns at LA level.
Proven reoffending measures will be published
using the proposed 3 month cohorts. In response
to user feedback we will also publish average
reoffending rates which will be formed by taking
a weighted average of the four preceding 3
month offender cohorts on a quarterly basis. This
will enable local rates to be monitored on a
quarterly basis.
2 To use OGRS4/G for all
offender groups for assessing
the likelihood of reoffending
including juvenile offenders.
Respondents were concerned about the
suitability of using OGRS4/G for juveniles. As a
result OGRS4/G will be used for adult cohorts
only; for juvenile cohorts the Youth Offender
Group Reconviction Scale (YOGRS) will be
used.
3 To provide ‘interim estimates’
for publication as management
information until headline
results become available.
We will provide ‘interim estimates’ by counting
any proven reoffending to date as recorded on
MoJ’s PNC data extract.
4 A new outline structure for the
bulletin including reoffending
splits by CRCs and the NPS
divisions.
The new outline structure will be adopted. In
addition to this we will publish average
reoffending rates to enable local rates to be
monitored on a quarterly basis (see proposal 1).
5 To remove existing tables and
increase the use of pivot tables
and CSV files (with appropriate
disclosure measures) for
additional breakdowns of
reoffending data.
Some tables will be replaced by pivot tables and
CSV files. We have made some of these
changes with the existing reoffending publication
from October 2015.
6 To include some statistics
which show little quarterly
change, for example long term
reoffending rates, in an annual
publication?
We will publish some additional analysis on
proven reoffending in the annual publication. In
addition to this we will publish average
reoffending rates to enable local rates to be
monitored on a quarterly basis (see proposal 1).
5
3. Summary of responses
19 responses were received in response to the consultation and there was a wide range of
respondents. These included Police, Charities, NPS, CRCs, Youth Offender Teams (YOTs),
Local Authorities, Youth Justice Board, internal Ministry of Justice, Mayor of London, Office
for Policing and Crime and HMI Probation. A full list of those that responded can be found at
Annex A.
The majority of respondents used the questionnaire but a few respondents preferred the
format of a free letter. Of those who responded to the consultation, the vast majority
supported the proposals.
Below is a summary of the main comments received.
Proposal 1: Do users agree with changing to three month cohorts to measure all
reoffending (not just PbR outcomes) and the creation of annual cohorts, combining
the preceding quarterly cohorts, to permit geographical breakdowns at LA level
including those used by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) for Youth Offending Teams
(YOTs)
From the comments provided there was general agreement with changing to a three month
cohort.
Some respondents expressed concerns at the loss of geographical information on a
quarterly basis as this was vital to manage reoffending at a local level. There was some
concern that there would also be a loss of comparability as there would be a break in the
series where the measure changed.
One respondent was concerned that the measure would be to bias towards prolific
offenders. Another respondent expressed concerns that measures such as previous
offences per offender and serious reoffending may be lost; proposing that two different sets
of reoffending measures should be produced for adults and young people.
Respondents expressed interest on longer term reoffending rates (for example 2, 5 and 9
year proven reoffending rates). It is foreseen that these will be published on an ad-hoc basis.
Proposal 2: Are users content with the use of OGRS4 for all offender groups for assessing the likelihood of reoffending?
The majority of respondents welcomed the inclusion of the use of OGRS4 but there would need to be appropriate explanation of the measure and its comparison to OGRS3 at the time of introduction.
There was concern of the suitability of using OGRS4 for juveniles. Respondents suggested alternative measures such as YOGRS or asset plus as more appropriate measures for assessing the likelihood of youth reoffending.
6
One user opposed as they wanted to use OGRS3.
Proposal 3: Does the proposal for providing ‘interim estimates’ for publication as management information until headline results become available, cover users’ needs?
Users supported the proposed move to provide ‘interim estimates’ by counting any proven reoffending to date as recorded on MoJ’s PNC data extract.
Respondents also expressed interest in receiving these estimates for different follow-up periods, an estimate of the accuracy of these results and inclusion of different breakdowns, such as by local authority area and CRC owner.
A few respondents requested offender level data for offenders they manage.
One respondent objected to providing ‘interim estimates’ as had concerns that the information would be misleading.
Proposal 4: Do users support the outline structure for the bulletin including reoffending splits by CRCs and the NPS divisions?
Users supported the outline structure.
However, over half of the respondents were concerned about the loss of geographical information on a quarterly basis as these data are used to manage reoffending at a local level. They would require reoffending information broken down by local authority area and youth offending team on a quarterly basis as well.
Other geographical breakdowns were also requested; one respondent requested the data be broken down by Community Safety Partnerships and another requested that the information be broken down by Crime and Disorder Partnership level, ward and police beat level.
A few respondents requested information for all prisons and not just for ‘resettlement’ prisons.
Two respondents were concerned over the counting of offenders managed by NPS or CRCs.
Proposal 5: Are users content with the proposed removal of existing tables and the use of pivot tables and CSV files (with appropriate disclosure measures) for additional breakdowns of reoffending data?
Users supported the proposed move to CSVs and pivot tables with several commenting that they required offender level detail for management of offenders.
Proposal 6: Are users content with including certain statistics which show little quarterly change, for example long term reoffending rates for inclusion in an annual publication?
Generally respondents agreed with this proposal. One respondent did express concerns as
even if trends show little change, this information will still help inform them about their
activities and what they should or should not be doing. There was also concern that, if only
high level data were reported on, too much detail would be lost as although national
statistics may not show any change, locally they may.
Respondents requested quarterly geographical information be available.
7
4. Changes to proven reoffending measure
The quarterly publication from October 2017 onwards will provide proven reoffending
statistics for adult and juvenile offenders who were released from custody, received a non-
custodial conviction at court, or received a caution within a three month period (e.g. 1
October 2015 to 31 December 2015). All statistics will be provided for both adult and
juvenile (under 18) offenders.
4.1 Measuring proven reoffending
A proven reoffence, for all offenders, is defined as any offence committed in a one year
follow-up period that leads to a court conviction or caution in the one year follow-up or within
a further six month waiting period to allow the offence to be proven in court as shown in the
diagram below.
An offender enters the cohort if they are released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court, or
received a caution in the period October 2015 to December 2015.
Information regarding the proven reoffending behaviour of offenders will be compiled using
the Ministry of Justice’s extract from the Police National Computer (PNC), probation data
from the nDelius system managed by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS)
and data from the eAsset system managed by the Youth Justice Board (YJB).
The definitions and measurements document that is published alongside proven reoffending
quarterly statistics provides further information about the data sources mentioned above and
it will be updated when interim results are published in October 2016 and the new
publication is implemented in October 2017 to reflect any changes in methodology.
01-Oct-15 31-Dec-15 31-Mar-16 30-Jun-16 01-Oct-16 31-Dec-16 31-Mar-17 30-Jun-17 27-Oct-17
First offenderenters cohort
One year period in which reoffencesare measured
Last offenderenters cohort
We report on the offences that lead to a court conviction or caution within the year
OR within a further six months to allow the offence to beproven in court
Proven reoffending publication
8
4.2 Payment by results and National Probation Service proven reoffending
performance measure
The Transforming Rehabilitation reforms included opening up the probation service to a
diverse range of rehabilitation providers from the private, voluntary and social sectors
through 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) and creating a new public sector
National Probation Service (NPS), to manage high risk offenders.
A Payment by Results (PbR) approach was adopted for the 21 CRCs to develop and
implement effective ways of rehabilitating offenders and rewarding providers that devise and
deliver the most effective rehabilitation programmes.
Offenders are only included in a CRC’s PbR cohort the first time they commence an eligible
sentence (see below for exclusions) in the three month period. The same methodology will
be used for each NPS division’s proven reoffending performance measure.
Payment by Results for the binary rate (proportion of offenders who reoffend) and frequency
rate (average number of reoffences per reoffender) will be assessed for each CRC against a
baseline year of 20111. Using the same methodology as the 2011 baselines, 2012 and 2013
binary and frequency rate estimates will be produced. A time series of PbR binary and
frequency rates estimates from 2005 to 2013 will be published prior to the October 2017
publication.
1 PbR is paid for the achievement of statistically significant reductions in reoffending against the
baseline year of 2011 as set out in Transforming Rehabilitation Contracts with CRCs.
Probation – all offenders:
• released from a custodial sentence;
• who begin a community order;
• who begin a suspended sentence order;
• Aged 18 or over
Exclusions• Supervision default order
• Youth rehabilitation orders
• Other pre-CJA community sentences
• Unpaid work only
• Curfew only
• Electronic monitoring only
• Any combination of unpaid
work/curfew/electronic monitoring only
• Standalone Suspended sentence orders
NPS
High risk
offenders
CRCs
Low to medium
risk offenders
NPS division
performance
measure cohort
CRC Payment by
results cohort
9
4.3 Offender cohort breakdowns
As well as PbR and the National Probation Service reoffending performance measure, key
statistics will be provided for the following measures:
The headline measure - An offender is included in the cohort the first time they are
released from custody, convicted at court with a non-custodial sentence or receive a caution
within the three month period.
Index disposal (sentence type) - An offender is included in an index disposal cohort (e.g.
custody, caution, court order etc.) the first time they receive that disposal within the three
month period.
National Probation Service (NPS)/Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC) - An
offender is included in an NPS division or a CRC’s offender cohort the first time they are
managed by that entity within the three month period.
Prison - An offender is included in a prison’s offender cohort the first time they are released
from that prison within the three month period.
4.4 Three month offender cohorts
The current proven reoffending statistics publication reports on offenders who are released
from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court, or received a caution within a 12
month period. The new proven reoffending statistics publication will report on adult and
juvenile offenders who are released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at
court, or received a caution within a 3 month period, which will then align with the adult
Payment by Results element of the transforming rehabilitation reforms.
A proven reoffence, for all offenders, will continue to be defined as any offence committed in
a one year follow-up period that leads to a court conviction or caution in the one year follow-
up or within a further six month waiting period to allow the offence to be proven in court.
The impact of changing from 12 month offender cohorts to 3 month offender cohorts is that
there will be a greater proportion of prolific offenders and hence higher reoffending rates
when compared to the current measure of reoffending. On a financial year basis, annual
average reoffending rates will be formed by taking a weighted average of the four preceding
3 month offender cohorts.
A comparison of the current measure and the new measure for April 2013 to March 2014 is
presented below. It has been included to provide an indication of the impact of changing the
cohort, and the figures presented may not exactly match those in any future publication. The
new reoffending rate is around 4-5 percentage points higher for both adult and juvenile
offenders than the current proven reoffending rate.
10
Proportion of adult and juvenile offenders who reoffend in the current measure and
new measure: April 2013 to March 2014 quarterly and annual data
Users should refer to supporting consultation Excel tables to see a time series of the 3
month cohorts.
4.5 Historical data and geographical breakdowns
Proven reoffending rates for the annual and quarterly cohorts will be provided at the national
level back to 2000 to ensure trends are available on the same time series as the current
measure, and since this is the earliest date from which the data can be reliably produced.
Data are not available for 2001 due to a problem with archived data on Court Orders.
The three month cohorts limit the scope for geographical breakdowns owing to the smaller
number of offenders. We had originally proposed only providing geographical breakdowns
on an annual basis. There was, however, high user demand for these statistics on a
quarterly basis. Therefore, on a quarterly basis we will publish average reoffending rates
which will be formed by taking a weighted average of the four preceding 3 month offender
cohorts. This will enable local rates to be monitored on a quarterly basis.
We will provide local-level breakdowns of this data back to 2005 to provide a trend for local
areas. Data will not be provided at local level further back than 2005, reflecting both
concerns over quality of postcode information and the resources required to produce this
additional data.
New:
Annual
average cohort
Current:
12 month
cohort
Apr-Jun
2013
Jul-Sep
2013
Oct-Dec
2013
Jan-Mar
2014
Apr 2013-
Mar 2014
Apr 2013-
Mar 2014
Adult offenders
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%) 30.6 30.4 29.5 29.4 30.0 25.2
Average number of reoffences per reoffender 3.58 3.54 3.57 3.62 3.58 3.12
Number of reoffences 148,522 149,562 143,403 145,224 586,711 367,605
Number of reoffenders 41,489 42,216 40,114 40,143 163,962 117,864
Number of offenders in cohort 135,480 138,676 135,827 136,558 546,541 468,134
Juvenile offenders
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%) 42.9 42.6 42.6 43.5 42.9 38.0
Average number of reoffences per reoffender 3.36 3.37 3.46 3.46 3.41 3.12
Number of reoffences 19,380 19,514 19,093 18,568 76,555 50,184
Number of reoffenders 5,772 5,790 5,518 5,364 22,444 16,083
Number of offenders in cohort 13,443 13,600 12,943 12,321 52,307 42,299
All offenders
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%) 31.7 31.5 30.7 30.6 31.1 26.2
Average number of reoffences per reoffender 3.55 3.52 3.56 3.60 3.56 3.12
Number of reoffences 167,902 169,076 162,496 163,792 663,266 417,789
Number of reoffenders 47,261 48,006 45,632 45,507 186,406 133,947
Number of offenders in cohort 148,923 152,276 148,770 148,879 598,848 510,433
New:
3 month cohort
11
4.6 OGRS4/G and YOGRS – adult and juvenile likelihood of reoffending
As proven reoffending is related to the characteristics of offenders, the actual rate of proven
reoffending will depend, in part, on the characteristics of offenders coming into the system.
This actual rate provides users with sufficient information on what the level of reoffending is
(e.g. in their local area) and how it is changing over time.
In addition to the actual rate, we will use the OGRS4/G (Offender Group Reconviction Scale)
score to control for some differences in offender characteristics across different offender
groups. OGRS4/G is based on a well-established, peer-reviewed methodology for assessing
and representing reoffending risk.
OGRS4/G uses age, gender and criminal history to assess the reoffending risk of a given
group of offenders by producing a score between 0 and 1. These scores can be used to
compare the relative likelihood of reoffending either over time or between different groups of
offenders, with a higher rate meaning a group of offenders who are more likely to reoffend.
Reoffending rates (excluding frequency measures) will be adjusted by using OGRS4/G, to
take account of the influence that differences in offender mix can have on binary reoffending
rates. OGRS4/G adjusted rates will be used to determine PbR outcomes.
The OGRS4/G adjusted reoffending rate for a given CRC cohort will be calculated as the
observed reoffending rate for that cohort plus any difference between the OGRS4/G score in
that cohort and the 2011 CRC baseline cohort. This calculation standardises the mix of
offenders in each cohort of a given CRC to the 2011 mix for that same CRC. A similar
approach will be used for other offender groups (for example, Local Authority).
OGRS4/G is a model specifically developed for adult offenders and after consideration of
responses to this consultation, OGRS4/G will not be provided for juvenile offenders. We will
instead use the Youth Offender Group Reconviction Scale (YOGRS) to produce an adjusted
reoffending rate for juveniles. YOGRS is based on a similar methodology to OGRS4/G but
has some adjustments for younger age groups, its application to our data is in development.
Any substantial changes to OGRS4/G or YOGRS will be published in the accompanying
measurements and definitions document.
How to interpret OGRS4/G and YOGRS
In the example below we would say that the proven reoffending rate in CPA A has increased
by 1 percentage point from 2011. However, when controlling for changes in offender
characteristics, the proven reoffending rate fell by 1 percentage point since 2011.
OGRS4/G adjusted binary rate example
CPA A
Baseline
2011
Cohort period
(e.g. Oct-Dec 2015) Difference
OGRS4/G 53% 55% 2pp
Proportion of offenders who reoffend (%) 56% 57% 1pp
OGRS4/G adjusted reoffending rate 56% 55% -1pp
12
4.7 Interim results
One year proven reoffending statistics for PbR will not be available until October 2017; we
will produce interim PbR figures from October 2016. This will help to address the information
gap created by switching to three month cohorts for reporting reoffending and allows CRCs’
progress to be assessed at the earliest opportunity. We will also produce the equivalent
interim figures for the NPS divisions.
An offender enters the cohort if they are released from custody, received a non-custodial conviction at court, or
received a caution in the period October 2015 to December 2015.
Users supported the proposed move to provide ‘interim estimates’ by counting any proven reoffending to date as recorded on MoJ’s PNC data extract instead of measuring reoffending with a defined follow-up and waiting period. Some offenders in the three month cohort will have a longer follow-up period in which to reoffend. Despite this difference, its key advantage is to provide users with a more accurate picture of reoffending to date.
For this very reason we will use the ‘reoffending to date’ measure to produce interim
reoffending information. While this does not represent real time management information,
which CRCs might be able to procure themselves through local police force arrangements, it
will provide our best indication of progress to date for both CRCs and NPS divisions. We will
publish this as management information.
This addresses the desire of users, including the CRCs and the NPS divisions, to have early
indicators of progress in an accessible format. CRC’s are not obliged to share the real time
reoffending information they collect so this management information will address this
information gap until headline results are published. These estimates, however, will only give
an indication of progress and, therefore, care should be taken when interpreting them.
Alongside the current proven reoffending tables, early estimates of proven reoffending for
young offenders by Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) are published as management
information. This provides an earlier indication of proven reoffending trends for young
offenders. Following the publication of this consultation response they will be discontinued,
but will be replaced by interim results as described above by YOTs in the future.
Oct-
15
No
v-1
5
De
c-1
5
Jan
-16
Fe
b-1
6
Ma
r-16
Ap
r-1
6
Ma
y-1
6
Jun
-16
Jul-
16
Au
g-1
6
Se
p-1
6
Oct-
16
First offenderenters cohort
Time period (~11 months) in which reoffences are measured
Time period (~8 months) in which reoffences are measured Last offenderenters cohort
We report on the offences that lead to a court conviction or cautionwithin this time period
Interim results
publication
13
4.8 Publication outline
The existing adult and juvenile reoffending statistics will continue in their current form until
the reoffending outcomes for the first Payment by Results cohort become available in
October 2017.
The proven reoffending publication from October 2017 will provide proven reoffending
statistics by:
offender characteristics (e.g. gender, age group, ethnic group, index offence)
type of reoffence (e.g. Violence Against Person, Burglary)
index disposal (sentence type)
individual prisons
local authority
Community Safety Partnerships
Youth Offending Teams
The publication will include an additional chapter on CRC Payment by Results and NPS
division proven reoffending performance measure.
For all offender cohorts the following reoffending measures will be published:
The proportion of offenders who reoffend
The average number of reoffences per reoffender
Average OGRS4/G score for adults and average YOGRS for juveniles
OGRS4/G adjusted reoffending rate for adults and YOGRS adjusted reoffending rate
for juveniles
These will be published alongside these supporting values:
Number of offenders
Number of reoffenders
Number of reoffences
The number of reoffenders, reoffences and previous offences based on less than five
offenders will be suppressed. This is to prevent the disclosure of individual information.
From October 2016 interim results as described in section 2.7 will form part of the quarterly
statistics. The October 2017 publication will include a summary on the differences in
methodology from those presented in the previous publication.
Proven reoffending statistics will be published in a set of Excel tables which provide key
statistics, and data tools (pivot tables and CSVs) which provide more detailed breakdowns.
We have made these changes with the existing reoffending publication from October 2015
onwards so users will be familiar with this format.
On an annual basis from January 2018, further analysis on proven reoffending statistics in
emerging areas of interest will be published, for example, long term reoffending rates as
described below and additional analysis on Serious Further Offences (SFOs). This will
provide users with the opportunity to comment on plans for future reoffending analysis.
14
In the headline measure a proven reoffence is defined as any offence committed in a one
year follow-up period that leads to a court conviction or caution in the one year follow-up or
within a further six month waiting period to allow the offence to be proven in court. Long term
reoffending rates would be where reoffending is measured over a longer follow-up period
(e.g. two years, five years).
4.9 Publication timetable
Publication
date
One year
reoffending rate
Quarterly cohort
One year
reoffending rate
Annual average
Interim
reoffending rate
Quarterly cohort
Oct-16 - - Oct15-Dec15
Jan-17 - - Jan16-Mar16
Apr-17 - - Apr16-Jun16
Jul-17 - - Jul16-Sep16
Oct-17 Oct15-Dec15 - Oct16-Dec16
Jan-18 Jan16-Mar16 Apr15-Mar16 Jan17-Mar17
Apr-18 Apr16-Jun16 - Apr16-Jun17
Jul-18 Jul16-Sep16 - Jul16-Sep17
Oct-18 Oct16-Dec16 - Oct16-Dec17
15
Annex A: List of respondents
The list of respondents who gave details consisted of the following organisations:
South Yorkshire Police
Merseyside Criminal Justice Board (MCJB)
Prison Reform Trust
Barnsley Council
Youth Justice Board
Wales CRC
Midlands NPS
Kent, Surrey and Sussex CRC
Reducing Reoffending Partnership (Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire
and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Company and Staffordshire and West
Midlands Community Rehabilitation Company).
Interserve Justice / Purple Futures
False Allegation Support Organisation
The Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire CRC
Dudley’s Community Safety Partnership – on behalf of Safe & Sound (Dudley’s
Community Safety Partnership). Members includes West Midlands Police, West
Midlands Fire and Rescue Service, Dudley CCG, Staffordshire and West
Midlands CRC, Staffordshire and West Midlands NPS, Dudley MBC and a
number of partners from the Community and Voluntary Sector.
NPS Development and Business Change, Performance and Quality team
MoJ Reducing Reoffending Analytical Programme
County Durham Youth Offending Service
The Solihull Partnership
MOPAC – Mayor of London, Office for Policing and Crime
HMI Probation
16
Contact points
Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office: Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: [email protected] Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to:
Nick Mavron Ministry of Justice Justice Statistics Analytical Services 7th Floor 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ
General enquiries about the statistical work of the Ministry of Justice can be e-
mailed to: [email protected]
General information about the official statistics system of the United Kingdom is
available from http://statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-
system
Alternative formats are available on request from
© Crown copyright 2015
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0
except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit
nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the
Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email:
